Federal Courts Should Have Judicial Powers

Judicial review, which refers to the authority of the Supreme Court to declare a decision or action of the Executive or Legislature unconstitutional, is the best-known power confined within the judiciary. The Constitution does not explicitly state or give the Court judicial review powers. Rather, the Court established the basis of the judicial review doctrine through the verdict in the Marbury v. Madison case in 1803.[1] The Supreme Court invalidated its first Congressional statute, meaning that federal courts could keep the other arms of government in check, which is a contentious issue. Essentially, federal courts should continue to exercise judicial review powers to ensure the legislature and the executive branches do not overstep their legal mandate and pass Acts of Congress contrary to the Constitution, meaning the judiciary must act as an internal self-check system.

The three arms of government: the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary, are mandated to operate within the confines of the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land. Each of these arms has unique obligations specifically inscribed in the Constitution for the certainty of seamless government operations. As the branch responsible for interpreting the Constitution, the judiciary ensures that the executive and the legislature do not overstep their Constitutional mandate. Importantly, the judiciary must defend and protect the Constitution from any attempts to undermine its importance . In the Marbury v. Madison (1803) case, the Court reaffirmed that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, meaning it overshadows Acts of Congress.^[2] As the authority in charge of interpreting the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, federal courts ought to retain the judicial review powers.

The judiciary has had the constitutional right to legally demand accountability and appropriate conduct of the executive and legislature for a long time. The Judiciary Act of 1789 granted the Court the constitutional mandate to issue legal orders requiring government officials working for other arms of government to act in conformity with the law.^[3] With the Judiciary Act in effect, the Court has consistently served as the watchdog over the other branches of government, often upholding the notion that the Constitution overrides an Act of Congress as the supreme law of the land. Chapter VI of the U.S. Constitution explicitly explains this constitutional supremacy.^[4] The Court has since established its constitutional authority and power to strike down any state law, decision, or action of the executive or legislature that violates the Constitution. As a key component of the judicial system, federal courts are entitled to judicial review powers.

The judicial system has a fundamental role in the U.S. constitutional system of governance. With the Supreme Court as the highest Court, the judiciary helps in interpreting the Constitution whenever legal disputes arise. The mandate to interpret the Constitution culminates in the judicial review powers, which are the authority of the Supreme Court to call out the executive and the legislature whenever they violate the Constitution. As they are an important part of the judicial system, federal courts deserve the mandate to exercise judicial review powers. Essentially, judicial review power is important, considering that it helps to keep the government in check. The executive and the legislature cannot overstate their mandate and disregard or violate the Constitution if judicial review powers are evenly distributed throughout the judicial system.

1.Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 147-148 (1803). ↑

2.Id. ↑

3.The Judiciary Act of 1789, 1 Stat. 73 (1789). ↑

4.U.S. Const. art. VI, § 2, cl. 2. ↑

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 147-148 (1803).

U.S. Const. art. VI, § 2, cl. 2.